Counselling Student sues School over required LGBT sensitivity training.

[grunion]

Re: Student Sues for being required to take GLBT sensitivity training.

how is someone who believes in invisible sky people qualified to counsel others? seems to me atheism should be a requirement for anyone applying for the position (or for any job except janitorial/food service work actually)

 

[CidBahamut]

Re: Student Sues for being required to take GLBT sensitivity training.

how is someone who believes in invisible sky people qualified to counsel others? seems to me atheism should be a requirement for anyone applying for the position (or for any job except janitorial/food service work actually)

Now that's just stupid. Believing in invisible sky people or whatever gives you spiritual peace shouldn't bar you from holding a job counseling others. Not being able to check your religious baggage at the door each day when you come to work is another matter entirely.
It's also relatively easy to accomplish, provided you are a stable individual to begin with.

I spend all day working with folks who are pretty gung-ho for the political party that makes me facepalm on a regular basis, but I'm sensible enough to not make an issue of my differences in politics at the office. On my own time, sure, but when you're working in a professional environment you need to be, well...professional.

 

[Lukas]

lol I wouldn't go that far, but I do think that some jobs require you to leave your principles at home. Whether you're a Christian, an Atheist, Jewish, or you're a believer in the Invisible Unicorn. Leave that shit in your journal before you rock up to work.

I know I'm a die-hard Atheist and almost done training to be a Lit Lecturer. If one of my students were to write an essay about Religion in one of the texts we're studying, I would definitely not hold it against them - so long as it's a well conceived essay. Why? Because my job is to develop their reading/comprehension and writing skills, not to judge them. I save that for QCDN

 

[Tristam Green]

Re: Student Sues for being required to take GLBT sensitivity training.

how is someone who believes in invisible sky people qualified to counsel others? seems to me atheism should be a requirement for anyone applying for the position (or for any job except janitorial/food service work actually)

as two other fine gentlemen have already stated, there is just so, so much wrong with your statement. have fun living in the bastard evil twin of patriarchies.

 

[Raesvelg]

You should obviously be allowed to believe in whatever you want, so long as your beliefs do not color or affect your judgment or advice in a counseling role.

Period.

You want to believe that the underpants gnomes show up every night to steal your knickers, that's your prerogative, so long as you give sound advice on the topics people come to discuss with you, and make no effort to convince them that the underpants gnomes are real.

 

[Tristam Green]

That's right. If you want to proselytize, become a preacher.

 

[Valandil]

That's right. If you want to proselytize, become a preacher.

The really asinine aspect of her position is that if she TRULY wanted to help people WHILE using her religious beliefs as her overarching guidelines, then she would simply become a pastor. In my opinion, what is likely is that she either A) wants to make more money doing what a pastor does when he or she isn't delivering a sermon B) doesn't want to hold herself to the same personal moral standards which are, at the very least, implied within the role of a pastor or C) a combination of both A and B. Regardless of your particular Christian doctrine, there are thousands upon thousands of "counselor" positions within the infrastructures of virtually every Christian doctrine represented within North America and Europe.

 

[Tristam Green]

My money's on that she wants to be like Joel Osteen, or any other of the plethora shepherds-cum-self-help-writers.

 

[Nyosan~]

Re: Christian trick sues School over... First Amendment violation?

The moral problem doesn't arise from her personal beliefs, it comes from the fact that she is to become a counselor. Counselors are supposed to be completely void of judgement. Neutrality strengthens the trust between client and therapist, and from an ethical standpoint is the best approach to avoid further psychological conflicts evolving from feelings of guilt or inadequacy.

Perhaps it's my lack of experience with counselors, but I have a hard time thinking of them as "void of judgment." They've been brought up to their position via specific training, and I'd be surprised if they didn't apply the models and theories they've learned to their work. That's hardly void of judgment, in my view.

Your analogy is poor. If an Arms-dealer were in a position of ethical responsibility and thought seriously about what every one of his customers might do with a gun, he wouldn't sell a single one. The ultimate solution would be not to sell guns to civilians but RAH RAH RAH Second Amendment AMERICA FUCK YEAH. The truth is these people have little to no accountability over any collateral caused by their businesses aside from, or in spite of what legislation may say. Think about it - how often is a gun-dealer arrested after a shooting?

Haha. Yeah, you're obviously neutral on this topic. I don't think there is any way we could come to a consensus when it comes to guns, so I'll just agree to disagree. I don't think there is any reason to punish the millions and millions of responsible gun owners.

Doctors, and in fact anyone working in Health, are bound to decisions which affect the well-being of their patients. That's why they don't sell hard drugs to people who want to use them recreationally and can prove that they are mentally stable.

And why don't they sell hard drugs to people who want to use them recreationally? Because they find it morally reprehensible, due to the damage that they forsee from the behavior. They're exercising their right to decide what treatment to provide, albeit with a little help from the ol' Gov't.

This bitch shouldn't pay lip service either. She should sit her little Christian arse down in those workshops and take it dead seriously. If she cannot see how being insensitive to some of her clients may detriment her work or worse, the client's condition, then she should GTFO and become a Chaplain or something.

I certainly agree that she could use the training. I obviously don't know anything about her apart from this article, but I have a hard time seeing how she would really be fit for counseling at all.

 

[Halifirien]

I guess I shouldn't be surprised the Alliance Defense Fund is all over this. If there's one thing they're good at, it's portraying Christians as victims when someone pushes back against their agenda. They fight tooth and nail against gay equality and then act butt-hurt when you call them bigots for it. Maggie Gallagher at the National Organization for Marriage has the same schtick: attack gay families at every turn and then accuse gays of being mean for pointing out she's a reprehensible asshole.

This girl might've learned an important lesson about going along to get along, but not with groups like ADF telling her she's being thrown into the lion's den instead of being required to take a remedial class.

 

[Hexx]

Re: Student Sues for being required to take GLBT sensitivity training.

Sorry Hexx, my thread title should have been a bit more descriptive.

Edit: Title changed.

No worries, shoulda looked better as well ^^ shoulda figured you or Miros woulda been all over that article

Being a Christian, her attitude, as well as the attitude of my brothers and sisters scares me. The way I learned about Christianity is that we should all be tolerant of others, regardless of their beliefs. Yes, preach the word of God, but preach it with love, not with hate. I was taught that God was a loving and merciful entity, not an angry and hateful one. /sigh these people need to re-evaluate themselves....

 

[Georgebobbilly]

Re: Student Sues for being required to take GLBT sensitivity training.

No worries, shoulda looked better as well ^^ shoulda figured you or Miros woulda been all over that article

Being a Christian, her attitude, as well as the attitude of my brothers and sisters scares me. The way I learned about Christianity is that we should all be tolerant of others, regardless of their beliefs. Yes, preach the word of God, but preach it with love, not with hate. I was taught that God was a loving and merciful entity, not an angry and hateful one. /sigh these people need to re-evaluate themselves....

you never read the old testament >.>

 

[Hexx]

Re: Student Sues for being required to take GLBT sensitivity training.

you never read the old testament >.>

Oh yes I did, but again, what was TAUGHT to me was different. The bible is supposed to be just an example, but shouldnt be taken literally either. A lot of what is in the bible is old, and out-dated, so those Christians that prefer to follow it strictly corner themselves and come off as extremely narrow-minded (hi to you WBC). I'm Christian, I'm proud to admit it (even if I dont always follow the tenets of the faith) but I also believe in equality for gay couples when it comes to marriage and adoption.

 

[Lukas]

Re: Christian trick sues School over... First Amendment violation?

Perhaps it's my lack of experience with counselors, but I have a hard time thinking of them as "void of judgment." They've been brought up to their position via specific training, and I'd be surprised if they didn't apply the models and theories they've learned to their work. That's hardly void of judgment, in my view.

I don't see how the application of a theory when treating a client is the same as judging them on a personal level. Choosing the best possible treatment is in the best interest of the client. Judging them personally is not.

Haha. Yeah, you're obviously neutral on this topic. I don't think there is any way we could come to a consensus when it comes to guns, so I'll just agree to disagree. I don't think there is any reason to punish the millions and millions of responsible gun owners.

I don't have to be. Agree to disagree.

And why don't they sell hard drugs to people who want to use them recreationally? Because they find it morally reprehensible, due to the damage that they forsee from the behavior. They're exercising their right to decide what treatment to provide, albeit with a little help from the ol' Gov't.

I think we're confusing morals with ethics now. For example, a doctor may think that homosexuality is immoral, yet agree that refusing to treat a gay patient goes against their professional ethics. Similarly, a doctor may not have a moral issue about selling drugs for recreation, but once again the ethics of their profession will direct their actions.

And doctors don't have a choice when it comes to treatment. Once again, the most effective treatment to bring about the most agreeable outcome for the patient, while causing no harm. There may be some disagreement as to what "the best possible treatment" is, but that has nothing to do with what the doctor thinks of the patient's personal life.

I certainly agree that she could use the training. I obviously don't know anything about her apart from this article, but I have a hard time seeing how she would really be fit for counseling at all.

I agree!

 

[Halifirien]

Looks like the religious right may be in trouble. Another student suing for the exact same thing had her case thrown out of court.

Detroit -- A federal judge today dismissed a lawsuit brought against Eastern Michigan University by a master's student who said she was removed from the school's counseling program because of her strong religious views against homosexuality.

...

On Monday, U.S. District Judge George Caram Steeh ruled in favor of the university and granted it summary judgment.

"The university had a rational basis for adopting the ACA Code of Ethics into its counseling program, not the least of which was the desire to offer an accredited program," Steeh said in a 48-page opinion.

"Furthermore, the university had a rational basis for requiring its students to counsel clients without imposing their personal values.

"In the case of Ms. Ward, the university determined that she would never change her behavior and would consistently refuse to counsel clients on matters with which she was personally opposed due to her religious beliefs -- including homosexual relationships."

The judge said Ward's "refusal to attempt learning to counsel all clients within their own value systems is a failure to complete an academic requirement of the program."

 

[Nyosan~]

Re: Christian trick sues School over... First Amendment violation?

I think we're confusing morals with ethics now.

eth·i·cal
1. pertaining to or dealing with morals or the principles of morality; pertaining to right and wrong in conduct.
—Synonyms
2. moral, upright, honest, righteous, virtuous, honorable.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical

The difference is who has determined what is right and wrong in that specific context.

Doctors have a set of ethics that are generally accepted amongst their peers. Sounds strikingly similar to the idea of morals set forth in religious circles. The content certainly varies to certain degrees, but it's just another example of a set of guidelines someone has developed, which are then adopted by groups of others.

 

[Lukas]

That definition is horrible lol.

Ethics are a product of inquiry and discourse. They are interactive solutions to problems and are always changing. An example would be when it was considered unethical for lawyers to advertise, this changed with the development of capitalism.

Morals (in the religious sense you're referring to) are static. They are accepted and then handed out on Sundays. They are also cumbersome when delivered en masse by Religion because they generally deal with very personal issues such as sex and relationships.

The funny thing is, Ethics never present as absolute truths whereas Morals do. The ethics behind a psychologist refusing to treat homosexuality comes from the understanding that it is not a mental illness. This was not always the case, so codes of ethics were adjusted. People who abide by strict Religious morals on the other hand, have the tendency to pick and choose which ones are more convenient, purely because they become constrictive as they do not evolve with society. For example, I believe that eating shellfish is declared immoral in the Bible, but how many people follow that as a rule? Furthermore, Thou Shalt not Kill is one of the Ten Commandments yet how many people of faith have no dilemma with going to war or capital punishment?

 

[Valandil]

Ethics and morals are the exact same thing. The word ethics comes from the Greek phrase ethike philosophia, which literally translates as "moral philosophy." Morals comes from the Latin word mos, which is a somewhat ambiguous translation that can mean "customs," "traditions," "law," and even "morals."

 

[Lukas]

No, they have subtle differences. And I believe the true origins of Ethics is the Greek "Ethos" which refers to personal or societal character.

 

[Valandil]

From the Oxford English Dictionary:

A. adj. (Now usually ETHICAL)

1. Relating to Morals
2. Of an author or literary work: Treating of moral questions, and of ethics as a science.
3. Characterized by 'ethos.'

B. n. I. sing. ethic

1. [after Fr. ethique, It. and Sp. etica, ad. L. ethice, Gr. ethike.] a. The science of morals; cf. 2. b. a scheme of moral science.

II pl. ethics

2. [after Gr. ethikos] The science of morals; the department of study concerned with the principles of human duty.
3. In narrower sense, with some qualifying word or phrase: a. The moral principles or system of a particular leader or school of thought. b. The moral principles by which a person is guided. c. The rules of conduct recognized in certain associations or departments of human life.
4. In wider sense: The whole field of moral science, including besides Ethics properly so called, the science of law whether civil, political, or international.

Synonym(s): moral philosophy